Claude Fable 5.1 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Max)
Which is better for the money: Claude Fable 5.1 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Max) by DeepSeek? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-26.
Depends on your budget
Claude Fable 5.1 (Xhigh, Default Fallba… scores 13.7 points higher (53.2 vs 39.5) but costs 13× as much to run the benchmark ($9063 vs $672; flagship vs premium cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Fable 5.1 (Xhigh, Default Fallba… when you need intelligence above 39.5, and DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Max) when 39.5 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Fable 5.1 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Max) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 53.2 | 39.5 | −25.8% DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (… is 25.8% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $9,063.11 | $671.96 | −92.6% DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (… is 92.6% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 108.69s | 15.14s | −86.1% DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (… is 86.1% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $10.0 / $50.0 | $0.29 / $1.20 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Max) vs Claude Fable 5.1 (Xhigh, Default Fallback): 25.8% less intelligence, 92.6% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 86.1% faster end-to-end.
Against the frontier
- Claude Fable 5.1 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) scores 57.60 for $8708.
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Max) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 51.00 for $662.
Compare something else
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5-1-xhigh/deepseek-v4-1-flash · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5-1-xhigh/deepseek-v4-1-flash?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill